Radeon HD 6320 vs R7 350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 350 with Radeon HD 6320, including specs and performance data.

R7 350
2016
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
5.12
+1363%

R7 350 outperforms HD 6320 by a whopping 1363% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking6671337
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.151.49
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameCape VerdeLoveland
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date6 July 2016 (9 years ago)15 August 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$554.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores51280
Core clock speed800 MHz508 MHz
Boost clock speedno data600 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million450 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate25.604.064
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS0.08128 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs328
L1 Cache128 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KBno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1125 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth72 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 27 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.12 0.35
Recency 6 July 2016 15 August 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 18 Watt

R7 350 has a 1362.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6320, on the other hand, has 205.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 350 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6320 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 350 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon HD 6320 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R7 350
Radeon R7 350
AMD Radeon HD 6320
Radeon HD 6320

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 555 votes

Rate Radeon R7 350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 231 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 350 or Radeon HD 6320, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.